from the good-move dept

In the past few weeks, we've discussed two particularly ridiculous proposals put forth by members of the European Parliament in the report that it is sending to the EU Commission for copyright reform across Europe. First was the proposal to remove freedom of panorama, which would allow countries to block the photography of certain buildings and structures, claiming that those photographs violated the rights of the architects. The second was a plan to support a link tax that would tax content aggregators like Google News for linking to content elsewhere.

Thankfully, both of these proposals were voted down, despite earlier indications that they might have enough support in Parliament. Either way, the real issue now is what proposal the EU Commission comes out with for copyright reform across the EU. Julia Reda who prepared the original report for the EU Parliament hopes that the EU Commission recognizes the importance of the public's rights in its eventual plan (though she continues to refer to them as "limitations" rather than the public's rights, as is more appropriate):

This decision embodies a central message of the report: Commissioner Oettinger cannot limit his upcoming reform proposals to improving conditions for cross-border trade. Reforming exceptions to copyright protection must be at the center of his initiative, since they fulfil such an essential, multi-facetted role: They provide creatives with the space to create new works, users with legal certainty for everyday activities, and access to culture and knowledge to everyone.

It calls for a reduction of geoblocking measures, particularly to allow cultural minorities to access content in their language online. The report asks for consideration of new exceptions for libraries and scientists when dealing with digital works, for example allowing e-lending. Creators should be strengthend in their negotiations with publishers, it states.

Jean-Marie Cavada, a French member of the centrist ALDE group, amended the report to claim that “virtually all the value generated by creative works is transferred to… digital intermediaries, which refuse to pay authors or negotiate extremely low levels of remuneration.”

Needless to say, there's going to be a lot of fighting over the eventual proposal.

Whew! I'm glad that's over!

What do the people of Europe think about these insane proposals? Has the European Parliament even asked them?

How can a politician claim they represent the people when said politician does not even ask the opinion of their constituents? I realize EU countries are not democracies (neither is the US) but the mouth pieces still claim they have the peoples support and they are doing their best to meet the peoples needs etc etc - is all bullshit. It is quite obvious who they represent.

Re:

US and EU aren't democracies, they aren't even capitalist anymore.They're totalitarian states where billionaires can murder anyone they want to (as long as the victim isn't rich) and get away with it scot-free. See: scientology, donald trump etc

Re:

Jean-Marie Cavada, a French member of the centrist ALDE group, amended the report to claim that “virtually all the value generated by creative works is transferred to… digital intermediaries, which refuse to pay authors or negotiate extremely low levels of remuneration.”

Just when you think...

Just when you think they're all a bunch of complete morons, they go and surprise you with a good deed.

Who would have thought it?

Hopefully, one of the members with two brain cells to rub together came to the conclusion that preventing photography of landmarks and other buildings would TRASH tourism once the word got out.

Imagine that happening in the U.S. Nope, sorry you can't get your picture in front of the Empire State Building. Nope, not in front of the Washington Monument or the Statue of Liberty... Nope... you can't get your picture with Mickey Mouse unless you pay a copyright tax fee. Sorry, no pictures of the Enchanted Castle except from designated fee based locations.